DNA tests are an anti-feminist appliance of science, a change in the balance of power between the sexes that we’ve hardly come to terms with. And that holds true even though many women have the economic potential to provide for their children themselves…Uncertainty allows mothers to select for their children the father who would be best for them. The point is that paternity was ambiguous and it was effectively up to the mother to name her child’s father, or not… Many men have, of course, ended up raising children who were not genetically their own, but really, does it matter…in making paternity conditional on a test rather than the say-so of the mother, it has removed from women a powerful instrument of choice.[emphasis mine]

Does anyone else see the irony in this feminist diatribe that is, among other things, anti-science, anti-male, anti-truth, anti-honesty, and anti-reality? I just about fell over laughing when I came to those words about removing from women "a powerful instrument of choice."

Yeah, right.

Today's Marxist/leftist and oh-so-progressive women's movement is nothing more than a powerful anti-female institution whose goal is to remove choices from women and to keep them locked up in the left's ideology. The last thing in the world these "champions" of female empowerment want is to allow women the opportunity to choose an option that is not sanctioned by the masters (and mistresses) of the collectivist left. Behar merely says out loud, and in the accepted tone of outrage and venom what they all believe deep in their black little hearts about any woman who does not automatically bow down before the holy altar of eternal .victimhood erected by the political left.

a : a lewd or immoral woman b : a malicious, spiteful, or overbearing woman —sometimes used as a generalized term of abuse

Now most reasonable persons might think that that it is highly malicious and spiteful--not to mention somewhat immoral-- for a woman to deliberately force a man to support a child she knows is not his. Most reasonable people might suspect that what the author of the article from which the second quote comes really objects to is the loss of power to control and humiliate men--a power that came with ignorance. Damn those scientists for taking that power--and ignorance-- away!

Once again, though, we see the power of unconscious defenses, e.g., projection, in action.

Ask yourself: who the real, honest-to-goodness bitches in these two little examples might be?